Summary: We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint about highway maintenance and road closures near her home. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complains the Council failed to properly maintain a road in its area which led to a partial collapse of the carriageway. She says the ongoing road closure for investigation and repairs work is taking too long, causing distress, and increasing her travel time and costs. She also complains about poor communication regarding other works in the area. She wants the Council to re-open the road and commission an independent review of the highways department’s actions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’.
3. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council, as a local highways authority, has a statutory duty to maintain the roads in its area. The Council is expected to routinely monitor the state of highways and carry out repairs where necessary. But the law does not set out the level of maintenance, frequency of inspection, or threshold for repair. This means these standards are open to interpretation.
6. Our role is to consider complaints of administrative fault. This means we consider the processes councils have followed to make their decisions.
7. Miss Y complains the Council failed to maintain the road and did not visit the site after it received damage reports from the public. The road then collapsed. The Council has closed the road while it completes investigations and repairs. The road is key to Miss Y’s regular travel so its ongoing closure causes her significant disruption.
8. In its complaint response, the Council explained the steps it took to maintain the road. This included investigations before the road’s collapse, reasons for postponing further investigations, and interim safety measures.
9. The Council also explained to Miss Y what action it has taken since the road collapsed. This included investigations to inform a permanent repair solution. The Council has signposted Miss Y to its website where it provides updates on the progress of the works.
10. We will not investigate this complaint. Although we acknowledge the ongoing road closure is causing Miss Y frustration and inconvenience, the Council has clearly explained its actions and reasons for the ongoing closure. We are unlikely to find fault with the Council’s decision-making process for the road’s maintenance and closure. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
11. Miss Y also complains the Council has not provided clear and timely communications about works affecting diversion routes. In its responses, the Council has explained why it cannot delay scheduled works in the area and that Miss Y can find information on roadworks and diversion routes on its website. This is an appropriate response to this part of her complaint so we will also not investigate this.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman